Haters gonna hate.
This is the year the Doctor takes that step and becomes the league's best point guard.
In short: shove it, Hewson.
Dr. Rosenpenis?Ha, yeah, I'm perfectly aware of that. But one of my buddies, and the most insanely diehard Bulls fan I know, calls Derrick the Doctor. I just think it's funny. It would probably be funnier if you knew my friend. He's a funny guy. Smokes a lot of pot.
So this won't be the last time you see me referring to the Doctor this year, especially because he's going to put it on bitches HARD. A legit MVP candidate.
In short: shove it, Hewson.
Also, the thought of Evan Turner makes me depressed about basketball.
That's my whole point. All indications are that he can't get it together. I don't even think I'll watch an NBA game all year. When's Penn State's first home game?I've heard he looks lost so far though.
When's Penn State's first home game?
NEW YORK -- NBA commissioner David Stern said Thursday there was no quantifiable progress in collective bargaining talks over the summer, and the league revealed it is seeking a reduction in player salary costs by about one-third.
Stern said the league wants player costs to drop $750 million to $800 million. Deputy commissioner Adam Silver said the NBA spends about $2.1 billion annually in player salaries and benefits.
"We would like to get profitable, have a return on investment," Stern said. "There's a swing of somewhere in the neighborhood of $750 to $800 million that we would like to change. That's our story and we're sticking with it."
Stern and Silver spoke after completing two days of meetings with league owners, who are seeking major changes to the current CBA that expires June 30. Silver said the league has told the union that owners are in a "diseconomic situation," with projected league-wide losses of about $340 million to $350 million this season.
Billy Hunter, the executive director of the players association, warned late Thursday that the league's stance could lead to a work stoppage.
"The position expressed by the NBA today is regretful, since in February 2010, the players unequivocally rejected the owners' proposal which called for a hard cap, a 40 percent rollback in player salaries, unlimited expense deductions and the elimination of guaranteed contracts," Hunter said in a statement.
"The players and the union would prefer to work towards attaining a fair deal that addresses concerns raised by both sides and improves the game. But, if the owners maintain their position it will inevitably result in a lockout and the cancellation of part or all of the 2011-2012 season. The players and union will prepare accordingly."
A person with knowledge of the owners' discussions told CBSsports.com that the league "will continue to be open to contraction" as a possible mechanism for restoring the league to profitability.
Though season ticket sales are up, both insisted that no matter how well the league does at the box office, it won't change the fact that an overhaul is necessary to a system in which the players receive 57 percent of basketball-related income.
"Even though we reported we have record season ticket sales over the summer and otherwise very robust revenue generation, because of the built-in cost of the system, it's virtually impossible for us to move the needle in terms of our losses," Silver said.
"There's no chance we can change the fundamental economics regardless of our success because it just costs us too much money to generate those sales."
The league and union began meeting last summer, and Stern said the sides had their most recent discussion in a small group this week. But they remain far apart on talks toward a new deal, raising fears of a lockout next summer.
"I couldn't give you any listing numerically or in word form of progress," Stern said. "But there seems to be a mutual determination to push and probe and do and discuss, because there's an increasing understanding on both sides of what the risk of not making a deal entails, and that this is actually palpable, but not quantifiable. So we're very much engaged in it."
The players association has responded to the league's claims of massive losses by calling for expanded revenue sharing among owners. Stern and Silver said the owners agree it's coming, but that it will arrive in conjunction with a new deal.
And while there's still time, Silver -- the lead negotiator for the league -- acknowledged that business could suffer if progress is not made soon. Ticket holders and sponsors will have decisions to make early next year without knowing if there's going to be a 2011-12 season.
"Before you know it, we're going to be at the beginning of 2011, and it's going to begin having an impact then and uncertainty is bad news for any business," Silver said.
Stern agreed with union executive director Billy Hunter's recent statement that February's All-Star weekend is an unofficial deadline to know whether there's going to be a work stoppage, saying, "We'll have a pretty good idea how good or not good things are by the end of February."
Also, Stern said the decision to call more technical fouls under the respect for the game guidelines won't be an issue much longer. Players are now whistled for making overt gestures or complaining too long to referees, and some are confused by how quickly they've been penalized during the preseason.
The union threatened legal action, but Stern said he doesn't think it will reach that point.
"The players will do more adjusting than the referees, but there will be some referee adjustments as well," Stern said. "I don't think it's going to be a problem."
NEW YORK -- In explaining the state of collective bargaining negotiations Thursday after what he termed a "blessedly uneventful" meeting with NBA owners, commissioner David Stern revealed just how drastically the league wants to reduce player salaries.
But what might have been low key for owners was a horror show for players. In short, as soon as the Year of the Big Three is over, Stern will look to shave players' salaries by one-third in a new CBA.
"What we told our players initially is that we'd like to get profitable and we'd like to have a return on our investment," Stern said. "And there's a swing of somewhere in the neighborhood of between $750 [million] and $800 million that we would like to change. That's our story and we're sticking with it."
In another staggering development, CBSSports.com learned that salaries may not be the only area cut as the NBA tries to gets its financial books up to speed with the explosion in popularity the league will experience this season. A person with knowledge of the owners' discussions said the league "will continue to be open to contraction" as a possible mechanism for restoring the league to profitability.
The owners' ongoing talks about competitive balance, profitability and revenue sharing have included the notion of whether teams are operating in "the best available markets," the person said, and whether reducing the number of teams from the current 30 would help improve the product and the bottom line.
I'm all for that. Saying goodbye to the Grizzlies, Timberwolves, Bucks and Bobcats would save the league a few hundred million in needless salaries and improve the product dramatically. When the NBA had 23 teams in 1980-81, having multiple Hall of Famers on the same team was the norm. Back then, the Heat would've been nothing special. Today, they're a national spectacle covered 24 hours a day.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the National Basketball Players Association, was traveling Thursday and unavailable for comment. But typically, sports unions have resisted efforts to jettison teams because of the resulting job losses. For example, eliminating the two most revenue-challenged NBA teams would mean the loss of 30 player jobs, not to mention coaching and front-office positions. Based on gate-receipts data, the teams that have struggled the most in the past two years of the current CBA are Memphis, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Indiana, Atlanta and Charlotte. The Sacramento Kings are a clear candidate for relocation, given that their stalled efforts to build a new arena resulted in what Stern termed a "disappointing" update on that franchise's future at Arco Arena.
Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor, one of those small-market owners, said the planning committee is "making progress" on a new revenue-sharing plan that is being worked out in lockstep with collective bargaining.
"I don't want to say we have the model," Taylor said. "I would say that we're looking at a number of different models."
After two days of meetings with the full Board of Governors, Stern pulled no punches in quantifying just how much salaries would need to be reduced to stem losses that NBA officials pegged at $380 million last season. Deputy commissioner Adam Silver, who is spearheading the labor negotiations, revealed Thursday that the league currently is projecting between $340 million and $350 million in losses for the upcoming season -- despite robust season-ticket renewals and record new season-ticket sales generated by the historic summer of free-agent movement that landed LeBron James and Chris Bosh in Miami with Dwyane Wade, plus Carlos Boozer in Chicago and Amar'e Stoudemire in New York.
Do the math: Reducing salaries by $750 million from their 2009-10 level of $2.3 billion would represent a 33 percent reduction in pay and benefits. The NBPA is "far from accepting that," Silver said.
No wonder. Such a dramatic reduction in salaries would be akin to the players accepting 41 percent of league revenues compared to the 57 percent they receive under the agreement that expires at the end of the 2010-11 season. But it isn't that simple; Stern had better hope so, or we're heading for a work stoppage faster than LeBron can say South Beach.
Stern conceded that "business is good," and pointed out that as revenues rise, player salaries rise with them. "It's a sliding scale," the commissioner said after his session with the media was over.
But more than that, the point league officials have made to owners -- both during bargaining sessions with the labor committee and to the full Board of Governors on Thursday -- is that significant savings could be achieved by changing the NBA's economic model without forcing the players to take such a big cut. League negotiators believe a hard cap, shorter contracts, less guaranteed money and a revamped revenue-sharing system with what Stern called "modest performance standards" would go a long way toward improving competitive balance and satisfying Stern's goal of assuring "all teams will have an opportunity to be profitable."
In other words, instead of eliminating entire franchises or forcing the players to accept a nearly billion-dollar pay cut, some of the problems could be solved by giving teams a way to get out of bad contracts. In much the way teams would have to meet certain performance standards under the revenue-sharing system they're concocting, players making millions would have to meet certain standards, too. Eddy Curry, who can't play anymore yet is making $11.3 million this season, isn't good for business.
Clearly, neither is a lockout coming on the heels of what could be the NBA's most successful season ever -- albeit, one awash in red ink.
"There's an increasing understanding on both sides of the risk of not getting a deal," Stern said.
And plenty of sacrifice, apparently, to go around.
NEW YORK -- NBA commissioner David Stern said Thursday there was no quantifiable progress in collective bargaining talks over the summer, and the league revealed it is seeking a reduction in player salary costs by about one-third.
Stern said the league wants player costs to drop $750-800 million. Deputy commissioner Adam Silver said the NBA spends about $2.1 billion annually in player salaries and benefits.
"We would like to get profitable, have a return on investment," Stern said. "There's a swing of somewhere in the neighborhood of $750 to $800 million that we would like to change. That's our story and we're sticking with it."
Billy Hunter, the executive director of the players association, warned late Thursday that the league's stance could lead to a work stoppage.
"The position expressed by the NBA today is regretful, since in February 2010, the players unequivocally rejected the owners' proposal which called for a hard cap, a 40 percent rollback in player salaries, unlimited expense deductions and the elimination of guaranteed contracts," Hunter said in a statement.
"The players and the union would prefer to work towards attaining a fair deal that addresses concerns raised by both sides and improves the game. But, if the owners maintain their position it will inevitably result in a lockout and the cancellation of part or all of the 2011-2012 season. The players and union will prepare accordingly."
Stern and Silver spoke after completing two days of meetings with league owners, who are seeking major changes to the current CBA that expires June 30. Silver said the league has told the union that owners are in a "diseconomic situation," with projected league-wide losses of about $340-350 million this season.
Though season ticket sales are up, both insisted that no matter how well the league does at the box office, it won't change the fact that an overhaul is necessary to a system in which the players receive 57 percent of basketball-related income.
"Even though we reported we have record season ticket sales over the summer and otherwise very robust revenue generation, because of the built-in cost of the system, it's virtually impossible for us to move the needle in terms of our losses," Silver said.
"There's no chance we can change the fundamental economics regardless of our success because it just costs us too much money to generate those sales."
The league and union began meeting last summer, and Stern said the sides had their most recent discussion in a small group this week. But they remain far apart on talks toward a new deal, raising fears of a lockout next summer.
"I couldn't give you any listing numerically or in word form of progress," Stern said. "But there seems to be a mutual determination to push and probe and do and discuss, because there's an increasing understanding on both sides of what the risk of not making a deal entails, and that this is actually palpable, but not quantifiable. So we're very much engaged in it."
The players association has responded to the league's claims of massive losses by calling for expanded revenue sharing among owners. Stern and Silver said the owners agree it's coming, but that it will arrive in conjunction with a new deal.
And while there's still time, Silver -- the lead negotiator for the league -- acknowledged that business could suffer if progress is not made soon. Ticket holders and sponsors will have decisions to make early next year without knowing if there's going to be a 2011-12 season.
"Before you know it, we're going to be at the beginning of 2011, and it's going to begin having an impact then and uncertainty is bad news for any business," Silver said.
Stern agreed with Hunter's recent opinion that February's All-Star weekend is an unofficial deadline to know whether there's going to be a work stoppage, saying, "We'll have a pretty good idea how good or not good things are by the end of February."
Also, Stern said the decision to call more technical fouls under the respect for the game guidelines won't be an issue much longer. Players are now whistled for making overt gestures or complaining too long to referees, and some are confused by how quickly they've been penalized during the preseason.
The union threatened legal action, but Stern said he doesn't think it will reach that point.
"The players will do more adjusting than the referees, but there will be some referee adjustments as well," Stern said. "I don't think it's going to be a problem."
NEW YORK -- Commissioner David Stern says everyone should know by late February whether the NBA is headed toward a lockout or toward a labor settlement.
With that statement in mind, here are two predictions:
Prediction No. 1: Come mid-February, Stern will say something along the lines of "it's too difficult to tell right now which track we're heading down."
Prediction No. 2: When D-Day arrives June 30 (the date the current labor agreement expires), the sides will agree to stop the clock and continue talking for another day or two or three.
Which means that July 2 or 3 or 4, we'll know for sure whether it's war or peace, lockout or no lockout.
I've been covering the NBA and its on-the-court and off-the-court business for more than a decade and a half, and I have gotten to know a vast majority of the key players in this drama personally. (Examples: Billy Hunter will not take a mulligan in golf if his manhood is challenged; lead NBA attorney Rick Buchanan has hair that would make Vinny Del Negro jealous; Stern has silver coffee urns brought to his office while his staff makes due with Gevalia machines.) And my opinion, coming out of Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver's news conference following the conclusion of the Board of Governors' meetings at the St. Regis Hotel, is this:
There's a 60 to 70 percent chance they settle, a 30 to 40 percent chance there is a lockout.
Here's why:
First and foremost, eventually they have to settle, because without a settlement, there is no NBA. Stern is no Gary Bettman, and he is not about to kill his sport. Further, Stern knows better than anyone that if there is a work stoppage, history has shown it takes about five years to build a business back to where it was before the stoppage.
If you settle without imposing a lockout, the public does not take sides. But if there is a lockout, the owners and the commissioner will have no choice but to demonize the very players they have spent the past five years promoting as such good global citizens through programs such as NBA Cares and Basketball Without Borders. All that sweat equity goes out the window if the players are portrayed or perceived as greedy.
If you look at an imaginary NBA growth chart that begins in 1999 -- when the last lockout ended -- and carries out 20 to 25 years, which is when LeBron James, Kevin Durant and their ilk likely will be nearing retirement, that chart continues to go up and up and up in terms of popularity, especially as it relates to the younger demographic that has tuned out baseball and embraced basketball. (And that's just domestically. The equation gets much larger when you factor in the global markets the league has cultivated so determinedly for the past decade.)
Does it make sense to dynamite all that good will, all those good vibes and all that good future growth potential?
Methinks not.
Here's another thing: The faces of the players and the owners have turned over quite a bit since the last work stoppage in 1998-99, but the faces of the main power brokers (Stern and players' union director Hunter) and the faces of the lawyers who have to hammer out the eventual settlement are, for the most part, the same faces who've been negotiating these collective agreements and various team versus player grievances for a decade and a half.
All those lawyers have developed their own relationship dynamics, and they all have one piece of shared common knowledge that they all know will ultimately be a major factor: The horse trading that goes on in these negotiations always happens at the end, and there's really no reason for any of those familiar faces to expect anything but the same to happen again this time.
Stern makes the argument that sponsorship and season-ticket renewals will take a big hit in March, April and May if the uncertainty over a work stoppage lasts into late June. But I would retort that much of that economic damage can be undone, through hard work, over the course of the summer if a new collective bargaining agreement is in place in early July.
Here's something else to chew on: Most people expect the National Football League to be going through its own labor war a year from now. And if there is no NFL next October, there are going to be an awful lot of idle sports fans, many in the demographic Stern is trying so hard to appeal to, sitting around looking for something to fill the void.
Does the NBA really want to miss out on an opportunity to capture some of that audience? Again, methinks not.
As badly as some teams are hurting economically, the owners are already discussing ways to create a revenue sharing pool larger than the $54 million they currently share. That alone will help give some of the weaker franchises a fighting chance to become profitable.
From the players, the owners are seeking a fundamental change in the way basketball related income (BRI) is calculated, whereby expenses instead of just revenues would be included in the equation and the players would receive some percentage of that number (currently, players are guaranteed 57 percent of BRI). The union is not completely opposed philosophically to changing the BRI formula, but if it goes down that road, it is going to want to continue receiving a big slice of the pie.
If the sides agree to keep expenses out of the BRI equation, the players would be open to negotiating down from their guaranteed 57 percent of revenue, so long as the soft salary cap (which includes the Larry Bird exception and the mid-level exception) survives in some form.
"There seems to be a mutual determination to push and probe and do and discuss, because there's an increasing understanding on both sides of what the risk of not making a deal entails," Stern said.
Remember, the sides already have mechanisms in place such as the luxury tax (paid by the highest-spending teams and redistributed to non-tax-paying teams) and the escrow tax (whereby 9 percent of players' salaries are withheld to ensure their percentage of revenues does not exceed 57 percent) that determine how their pools of money are divided up. Those structures can be maintained and tweaked in the new deal to give every owner an opportunity to be profitable so the entire operating system does not have to be reinvented.
Owners and players met in a bargaining session earlier this week, Stern describing the ongoing discussions as no more than "constructive dialogue." More meetings are scheduled, and by the All-Star break we'll get the commish's reading on where things stand. After that, there will be more rhetoric, more doomsday predictions, maybe even a personal attack.
But come late June (and/or the first few days of July), the time to get the deal done will have arrived.
And the bottom line is this: Both sides might be stubborn, but they are not stupid.
They are smart. And the smart thing to do when it comes down to money time is to find a middle ground that both sides can live with. It's pure common sense, and the NBA has too much invested in keeping that long-term growth chart moving upward to do something stupid that would damage its brand.
In the end, cooler heads will probably prevail and reasonableness will probably triumph. I'll even go way out on a limb and take a gander at exactly when that'll happen: between 10 and 11 ET on the night of July 3, 2011 -- 70 to 71 hours after the sides stop the clock to continue talking.